DE: Uncontradicted proof of possessory interest in apt. showed standing

“The trial court erred in finding that Cooper did not have standing to challenge the search. Although Cooper did not introduce a lease or deed or other documentation, the evidence showed that Cooper had a possessory interest in the residence. Bradley’s father testified that Bradley was living with Cooper. And the testimony of Bradley’s mother twice referred to 2450 North Market as ‘Ms. Cooper’s house.’ This witness testimony about Cooper’s residency was unchallenged.” Cooper v. State, 80 A.3d 959 (Del. 2013).

Defendant waived review of the U.S.M.J.’s R&R by not seeking de novo review. Even so, defendant was arrested in his house and there was a protective sweep. He was Mirandized and spoken to in Spanish and consented, so the search is good on the merits. United States v. Brache, 543 Fed. Appx. 930 (11th Cir. 2013).

The motion to suppress was denied on the police report and the pleadings by agreement. The case is remanded to settle the record as to what exactly happened. Jones v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 611, 2013 Ark. App. LEXIS 640 (October 30, 2013).*